Hello Peter,
On Friday, June 10, 2005 at 23:56:22 GMT +0200 (which was 23:56:22
where I live), Peter Palmreuther wrote and made these valuable points
on the subject of spamalot:
Hello Dick,
On Friday, June 10, 2005 at 10:44:52 PM Dick [DH] wrote:
*erm* Maybe I'm dense and therefore don't
Hello Mark,
On Saturday, June 11, 2005 at 11:25:20 GMT +0200 (which was 11:25:20
where I live), Mark Partous wrote and made these valuable points on
the subject of spamalot:
Hello Dick,
Saturday, June 11, 2005, 9:54:51 AM, you wrote:
DH So, the (sometimes complicated) email client
Hello Jan,
On Sunday, June 12, 2005 at 19:52:08 GMT -0400 (which was 1:52:08
where I live), Jan Rifkinson wrote and made these valuable points on
the subject of spamalot:
On Saturday, June 11, 2005 it appears that Dick Hoogendoorn
wrote the following in regards to spamalot:
DH [snip] you need
PF I am using BayesIt here at work and it is far, far worse at
PF correctly marking spam than my setup at home: SpamPal (with
PF white/blacklists, private and public) with the Bayesian and P2P
PF plugins. This combination is probably running at over 99,5%
PF success rate. Continuously.
KC
Hello Kevin,
Friday, June 10, 2005, 3:00:00 PM, you wrote:
KC - From the messages posted here, both recently and in the past, I think
KC its safe to conclude that 3rd party relay type solutions seem to offer
KC better performance than the plug-ins. For those with a spam problem,
KC its probably
Hello Kevin,
On Friday, June 10, 2005 at 15:15:36 GMT -0400 (which was 21:15:36
where I live), Kevin Coates wrote and made these valuable points on
the subject of spamalot:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi Philip,
On Fri, 10 Jun 2005 18:51:48 +0100 (1:51 PM here), Philip
6 matches
Mail list logo
